And in the same house abide, eating and drinking such things as they have; for the workman is worthy of his hire. Remove not from house to house.
The seventy go ahead of Jesus into every town He is about to visit, carrying no money, no bag, no spare sandals. Verse 7 tells them what to do once a door opens: stay in that one house, take the food offered, and count the worker worthy of his pay. It is a short line that later became the Bible's main text on supporting those who serve God.
Why accept a stranger's table? Because the Lord sent them out with nothing. One writer ties the two together, and also marks the limit of these travel orders:
The seventy were sent as lambs in the midst of wolves (v.3). As with the twelve in chapter 9:1-5, the Lord told them to carry no provisions with them: no purse (for money), no bag (for food), no extra shoes. The testimony was toward Israel, God's chosen nation, and Israel was responsible to care for the servants of Israel's Messiah… These instructions are not a commission for our day, for the Lord changed this completely in view of His coming death (Luke 22:35-37). But the seventy were to expect the hospitality of the houses they visited… The servant was to remain in that house as long as he stayed in the city, and was not to feel ashamed to share the food they offered. This was God's way of providing, and their labour deserved such recognition. Faith, in its simplicity and humility, would accept this, and would not restlessly try to pass the responsibility for one's keep around to others as well.
"Remain in the same house" is a restraint, not a comfort. One writer sees the Lord's own glory at stake:
There was to be no greed and no self-seeking. They cast themselves on hearts that were loyal to the Messiah, and took such things as were given. The Messiah Himself acknowledges the worthiness of the labourer: the labourer is worthy of his hire… They were not to go from house to house. That would take away from His glory, because it could look like self-seeking.
Another writer turns the same rule on us:
"Remain in the same house." We had this in the mission of the twelve — "Do not be looking out for better fare." What a defiling thing, to see the followers of Christ trying to make themselves comfortable here!
Matthew's parallel says the worker deserves his food; Luke says his wages. One writer says the Lord meant both words, and follows the point through to Paul's own practice.
The labourer is indeed worthy of his food, and of his hire, for there are other needs beyond food. The Lord forgot none of them, as this twofold statement makes plain (Matt. 10:10; Luke 10:7, as cited in 1 Tim. 5:18). So the apostle declares that the Lord ordained that those who preach the gospel should live by the gospel (1 Cor. 9:14), as the law had done before for those who served at the holy things. Yet in the same passage, while he insists on a right so just and true for others, we see this blessed man give it up for himself.
The verse grants a right. It does not create an employment contract. One writer draws the line clearly:
God did use the willing hands of His people here too. But no one thought that they "hired" him, or that he was their labourer. What they gave, it was to God they gave it, and his privilege was to be Christ's servant. His responsibility was to the Lord, and theirs also. They did not understand that they were to get so much work for so much money. They did not pay, but "offered." There is a wonderful difference; for you cannot "pay" God… The moment you pay, God is out of the question.
Paul repeats this exact sentence in 1 Timothy 5:18. One writer asks where Paul got it, and what that answer settles about Luke's Gospel.
The saying may well be a proverb, but the apostle quotes the phrase itself as "the scripture." Where did he get it? From the Gospel of Luke (Luke 10:7); for so it stands there word for word, not in Matt. 10:10, where the Lord says the workman is worthy "of his food."… it is a decisive instance of an apostle quoting from another inspired man as "scripture."
- Sent — empty-handed by design; the messengers carried no purse and leaned on God's way of providing.
- Received — one open door was enough; staying in it kept the message clear of any hint of self-seeking.
- Deserved — the Master Himself calls the worker worthy, and that right covers food and more besides.
- Offered — believers give their gifts to God, not wages to a hired man; the moment you pay, God is out of the question.
- Scripture — Paul quotes this line word for word from Luke and calls it Scripture: one inspired writer quoting another.
And into whatsoever city ye may enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you,
Jesus sent the seventy out two by two, ahead of Him, into every town He meant to visit. Verse 8 covers the welcome: when a town takes them in, they sit down and eat what the house serves — so why does a preaching mission need a rule about meals?
This mission comes after the Lord has already announced His death and rejection. One writer reads its tone as kindness with a warning inside it.
The mission of the seventy is found only in Luke. It has in itself a character of grace about it, though really, once rejected, it becomes the herald of judgment about to fall on Israel... Now, as the closing testimony to Israel, this new mission goes out to announce the kingdom of God — not only before the Lord had spoken of His rejection, but after it.
The messengers carried no money and no food bag. Their meals were part of the plan: the Messiah who sent them would move the hearts of the people they visited.
They were to trust (like the twelve apostles) the care of the Messiah, who was present on earth and moved hearts by divine power. They were to go as the Lord's labourers, openly declaring their purpose, not working for their food, but as having a claim on His behalf... Time pressed. Judgment was coming.
Taking the food of the house was more than convenience.
They were to eat the food given them, willingly identifying themselves with those who received them.
The same rule closed off any search for a better table. Moving from house to house would reflect on the Master they served.
There was to be no covetousness, no self-seeking. Casting themselves on the loyalty of hearts to the Messiah, they were to take whatever people gave them... They were not to go from house to house. This would take away from His glory, because it could look like self-seeking. The great point was the solemn claim of the Lord Jesus in Israel.
Another writer states the same warning plainly:
"Do not go looking for better food." What a defiling thing, to see the followers of Christ trying to make themselves comfortable here!
"They receive you" is the hinge of the verse. A town could also turn the messengers away, and one writer weighs what that refusal cost.
So rejecting this mission would be very serious. The greatness of the grace behind it made unbelief more dangerous, and its judgment more final... It would not alter the truth. They might reject it, but the kingdom of God had come near to them.
These directions were tied to a moment. Later the Lord Himself set them aside.
In Luke 22:35 the Lord looks back on this very mission and asks, "When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?" They said, "Nothing." Then the Lord tells them to provide themselves with a moneybag, a knapsack, and a sword. The very things they were not to take before, they were to take from that time on. The Lord sets aside what He had earlier commanded, so far as the special circumstances went. His goodness and love toward them would remain, and so would their walk in wisdom and harmlessness. But the special character of this mission ended at the death of Christ.
- Sent — the seventy appear only in Luke. Theirs is the Lord's closing appeal to Israel, sent out after He had spoken of His own rejection.
- Supplied — the messengers did not work for their food. They leaned on the Messiah who sent them, and He moved hearts to feed them.
- Seated — eating what the house served joined the messenger to the people who took him in.
- Satisfied — no looking for better food, no moving from house to house. A servant chasing comfort dims his Master's glory.
- Settled — the greater the grace, the graver the refusal. And the rule itself ended at the death of Christ, when the Lord told them to take a moneybag and knapsack again.
and heal the sick in it, and say to them, The kingdom of God is come nigh to you.
Jesus sends seventy messengers into the towns ahead of Him. Their whole task comes down to two things: heal, and announce. But what kingdom had come near while its King still walked the roads unrecognised? And what did the healings have to do with it?
Why send seventy messengers out at all? One writer reads the sending itself as kindness with a warning folded inside it.
Only Luke records the mission of the Seventy. It has a character of grace about it. Yet once rejected, it heralded the judgment about to fall on Israel.
Why heal at all, if the errand was a message?
They were to heal the sick by the miraculous power the Lord gave them. The purpose was to focus attention on their message: the kingdom of God had come near. This kingdom's authority rested in the person of the Lord Jesus, Israel's true King. Yet He made no claim to a kingdom on public display. The kingdom was among men in hidden form. It will be public when the Lord reigns. For now it had come in the person of the King. Many were subject to Him in heart, though He was not yet reigning.
The two sendings did not carry the same powers. One commentator notes the difference:
The apostles received delegated power to raise the dead (Matt. 10:8). The seventy received power to heal the sick, which included casting out demons (Luke 10:9, 17). But we have not a word about their raising the dead, and we read of no case of it except by the Lord and the apostles.
They carried real power. Yet the Lord put the weight on the words they were to speak.
There was no lack of power, but the word was, "The kingdom of God has come near to you." This they were to say to them. It was not a matter of a miraculous display to strike the mind or the eye, or of anything for this present life only.
Healing met sickness. The message went deeper. Why should anyone have to announce God's kingdom in God's own world?
They were to say, "The kingdom of God has come near to you," as well as to heal the sick. What a terrible verdict against this world, that God has to announce His kingdom in it! A well-ordered family would be insulted if you told the children to obey their parents. Yet the world has to be told to submit to God. That alone shows its true condition.
The same writer sums up the Lord's own ministry in one line:
He published God's claims while He met man's need.
The message did not change with the reception it got.
This is not just a statement that this or that is God's will. Whatever you do, whether you receive it or reject it, "the kingdom of God has come near to you." The condition of the world now is that it has rejected Christ. The Son of God, the King, has come into the world, put it to the test, and it says, We will not have Him.
Dust could be shaken off; something else could not.
That city might reject them. They would then shake off all connection with it, even the very dust its streets had left on their feet. But those who rejected the messengers could not shake off their responsibility. The kingdom of God had come near, and they had cared nothing about it. People may indulge in carelessness, indifference and scoffing, but a day of reckoning must come... What a responsibility rests on anyone who gets the chance to hear the message of God! It was so then. It is so now.
- Near in grace. The seventy went out to Israel in grace. Judgment followed only after the nation refused the message.
- Near in power. The healings were not the point. They fixed attention on the message the seventy carried.
- Near in person. The kingdom had arrived because the King had arrived — owned in hearts, not yet on public display.
- Near in claim. One visit relieved need and announced God's rights. The world had to be told to submit to God.
- Near regardless. Welcome or refusal changed nothing about the fact. A town could shake off the messengers, but not its responsibility for having heard.